Framerate
#1680 posted by nunu on 2015/10/14 06:44:08
cl_maxfps Doesnt works in Qspasm right ? Any tip to get my quake1 running at more than 70 fps ?
@nunu
#1681 posted by
primal on 2015/10/14 09:17:51
Change the max fps limit to number LIMIT with this command:
host_maxfps LIMIT
Show the result on screen:
scr_showfps 1
Since you are already running at around 70 fps, you won't need to mess with vsync. The command for it is vid_vsync if you do need to.
#1682 posted by
ericw on 2015/10/14 09:19:16
there's host_maxfps, but unfortunately going over 72fps can break physics (you get stuck on slopes, etc.)
Icon
#1683 posted by
Rick on 2015/10/17 20:24:22
I realize this is a pretty trivial thing, but the default Quakespasm icon is almost invisible against a dark (black) Windows desktop. Maybe a second one could be added that shows up better if a desktop shortcut is created.
#1684 posted by
Skiffy on 2015/10/20 14:26:19
8bit rendering would be a nice addition to emulate that is for sure. I don't know if there is a quake engine that supports it but I would love shadows on water. And has anyone considered expanding lighting to have ambient cube maps to capture light volumes instead of just sampling the bottom pixel under a monster?
#1685 posted by
Kinn on 2015/10/20 14:38:37
I don't know if there is a quake engine that supports it but I would love shadows on water.
This was discussed a while ago and no-one could agree on what these shadows should look like.
In my current map I've just gone "sod it" and literally made the fullbright water emit a little bit of light using the new surface light feature in eric's tyrutils. It's magic glowing water I guess. Looks not bad actually.
#1686 posted by
JneeraZ on 2015/10/20 14:51:24
Kinn - I too have embraced glowing water. Works pretty well, plus the area under the water gets lit for basically free.
Yeah
#1687 posted by
Kinn on 2015/10/20 16:34:31
I was surprised how ok it looks.
<czg> have a water-looking texture but it's actually lava
<czg> have blue lava. ths is new and pioneering!
#1692 posted by
necros on 2015/10/20 22:42:46
Makes sense since light hitting the surface would be reflected upwards and diffused by the ripples.
Drew
#1694 posted by
Kinn on 2015/10/23 11:27:44
Meh, it's just a bunch of unfinished brushwork and crap placeholder texturing.
Kinn
#1697 posted by
mankrip on 2015/10/29 08:23:20
"I don't know if there is a quake engine that supports it but I would love shadows on water.
This was discussed a while ago and no-one could agree on what these shadows should look like."
Retroquad does support it. Here's a bunch of screenshots:
http://mankrip.tumblr.com/post/120399970810
OH HECK YES
#1698 posted by
Skiffy on 2015/10/29 15:15:48
I like the look of that ALOT.
No Idea How That Works
But QS needs that desperately.
That Is Nice
#1700 posted by
Kinn on 2015/10/29 23:06:42
And the software look lends an extra special cachet to any engine.
Oh Wait
#1701 posted by
Kinn on 2015/10/29 23:07:58
It is a software engine. Impressive.
Stencil
#1702 posted by
Lunaran on 2015/10/30 19:50:07
Quoth supports loading any model for an entity, including .bsps, which is very useful in situations where the lighting doesn't matter (stained glass windows) but stencil alpha with a { texture doesn't work on a bmodel if it's loaded this way, only if it's built in the map itself. :(
Currently if you have an index 255 masked { texture it will only alpha as low as .7 I believe.
I can confirm this too - spiderwebs and the like below .alpha 0.7 just don't draw.
Thanks For The Report
#1703 posted by
ericw on 2015/10/30 20:07:02
will try to fix those. Weird that { textures would not work on external .bsp's, but I imagine it is something easy.
I think I know why entity alpha < 0.7 makes the whole fence texture disappear; normally the alpha test value in Fitzquake is left at 0.666, but I think I just need to lower it to (entity alpha * 0.666).
#1704 posted by Spike on 2015/10/30 20:07:45
There's only one alpha value, and you can't use it for both alpha testing/masking(NOT stencils! /me shudders) and alpha blending at the same time... well, you can, but the results are generally wrong.
glsl would allow it by doing any .alpha transparency stuff after the texture-only alpha test.
on the plus side, you might be able to get some funky burn-away effects.
also, its 0.667 and not 0.7. close enough though, but hey, precision!
but yeah... the exact details are very engine-specific, so try not to depend upon stuff too precisely.